Loading...
W912EP26QA006
Response Deadline
Aug 31, 2026, 1:00 PM(EDT)21 days
Eligibility
Contract Type
Solicitation
Amendment 1 Questions and Answers:
Question 5….
ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JANUARY 1999)
BASIS FOR AWARD
(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:
1. This acquisition will utilize a best value approach, in which the Government seeks to award to an offeror who provides the greatest confidence that they will meet the Government’s requirements affordably. The Best Value technique chosen for this particular acquisition will be Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable offer. Contract award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, is considered technically acceptable, and will provide the best value to the Government, considering price and past performance. Each proposal will be evaluated for all factors listed below.
a. Proposals that are unrealistic in terms of technical or price may be rejected at any time during the evaluation process. Offerors are cautioned to follow the detailed instructions fully and carefully, as the Government reserves the right to make an award based on initial offers received, without discussion of such offers.
2. Technical Proposal: The offeror’s proposal shall include documentation addressing the qualification requirements in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Evaluator(s) shall assign a rating which falls within one of the following ranges according to the degree to which the offeror meets the minimum requirements described above:
(1) Acceptable—Meets evaluation criteria and minimum requirements. Proposal is acceptable. Minor clarifications/corrections can be readily made.
(2) Unacceptable—Fails to meet minimum requirements. Deficiencies are significant and require major revisions to proposal to make it acceptable. If determined to be unacceptable, this will render the entire proposal as technically unacceptable and eliminate the offeror from further consideration.
3. Past Performance Evaluation: Using information provided in your proposal, the contracting officer will review performance information for only those offerors rated technically acceptable.
The Past Performance factor will be rated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. The Government will use information provided by the Offeror, the submitted past performance information, as well as any other information deemed necessary, as noted in the FAR 52.212-1 Addendum, to assess the Offeror's ability to meet the solicitation requirements. This assessment will be based on a demonstrated record of past performance, taking into consideration the recency and relevancy of the past performance data. Recency is defined as projects performed within the last five (5) years from the date of solicitation issuance. Relevancy will be determined by the similarity in scope, magnitude, and complexity of the work performed compared to the requirements of this solicitation.
The Offeror shall provide at least one (1) but no more than three (3) past experience projects. The Offeror must demonstrate proficiency to perform all PWS tasks. Collectively, the submitted projects must demonstrate similar corporate experience performing the PWS tasks and Sample PWS tasks. A single project is not required to demonstrate all tasks, provided the projects submitted collectively demonstrate experience across all required tasks.
Required Past Performance Project Information:
Project Contract Number
Project Title and Location
Project Description and identification of Key Personnel involved in the project
Project Start and End Dates
Prime Contractor performing the work
Subcontractor(s) performing work, including identification of the discipline or area of responsibility
In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available or is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see RFO 15.202(c)(1)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or "neutral") past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered Acceptable.
(1) Acceptable— Based on the offeror's performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror's performance record is unknown.
(2) Unacceptable— Based on the offeror's performance record, the Government does not have reasonable expectations that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.
4. Price/Cost Evaluation: Each offeror’s price will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness. Unrealistically low proposed costs/prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or the offeror has made an unrealistic proposal.
(a) Technical acceptability and past performance, when combined, are more important than cost or price.
(b)A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.
(c)The Government reserves the right to require the offeror to submit additional information as necessary to support a pre-award determination of responsibility.
(End of provision)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
USACE Jacksonville District is issuing this solicitation for necessary Custodial and Mowing Services for Palatka North Florida Aquatic Plant Control Field Unit. The proposed project will be a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Contract with a base of twelve (12) months and four (4) option years of twelve (12) months each for Custodial and Mowing Services.
Description of Services:
The scope of work is as described. Provide Custodial and Mowing Services to the field staff at the North Florida Aquatic Plant Control Field Unit. Provide refuse services for 3 locations including, NFAPCFU office, NFAPCFU shop, and Buckman herbicide storage building. Services shall include providing a dumpster and weekly refuse services.
Provide recycling services for 3 locations including, NFAPCFU office, NFAPCFU shop, and Buckman herbicide storage building. Services shall include but not be limited to recycling of aluminum, paper, cardboard, fluorescent light bulbs, batteries, plastic, and glass.
Provide lawn care services for 2 locations including NFAPCFU office and NFAPCFU shop. Services shall include but not be limited to: finish mowing, edging, herbicide application, and trimming of trees and shrubs.
Kelly Koger
Dustin Furrey
DEPT OF DEFENSE
DEPT OF THE ARMY
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
ENGINEER DIVISION SOUTH ATLANTIC
ENDIST JACKSONVILLE
W074 ENDIST JACKSNVLLE
W074 ENDIST JACKSNVLLE
KO CONTRACTING DIVISION
701 SAN MARCO BLVD
JACKSONVILLE, FL, 32207-0019
NAICS
Facilities Support Services
PSC
HOUSEKEEPING- CUSTODIAL JANITORIAL
Set-Aside
8(a) Set-Aside (FAR 19.8)